AG has not ‘directly responded’ to judge’s complaint seeking apology – acting Chancellor

-case set to continue on Monday

Acting Chancellor, Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards yesterday said Attorney General (AG) Basil Williams SC has not “directly responded” to the letter by Justice Franklin Holder demanding an apology over Williams’ conduct in his court on March 23rd, 2017.

Breaking weeks of silence on the controversy that has roiled the judiciary and the legal fraternity, Justice Cummings-Edwards also disclosed that the case has been set for continuation on Monday, 8th May raising speculation as to whether the AG will issue an apology in Justice Holder’s court or not appear.

Basil Williams

Justice Holder, in his letter of complaint to Justice Cummings-Edwards said that he was “not prepared to sit to hear Mr Williams as an attorney-at-law in any matter whatsoever, unless he makes a genuine and meaningful apology to my satisfaction, in open court, both to me and to the Members of the Bar since they too were scandalized by his despicable conduct”. Thus far Williams in his public utterances has said there is nothing to apologise for.

Justice Cummings-Edwards in a press release yesterday said that Justice Holder’s report on the courtroom encounter with Williams was shared with President David Granger out of courtesy and no complaint was made to him.

The acting Chancellor said that a copy of Justice Holder’s letter was sent to Williams “for his information, guidance and any response. To date Mr Williams SC has not directly responded to that letter”.

She gave no indication in yesterday’s press release about how the judiciary plans to handle the situation but simply said that the case in question will continue on Monday and that notices had been sent to all parties. After Williams’ outburst in the court on March 23rd, Justice Holder left the bench without setting a date for continuation of the matter.

According to the press release issued by the Registrar of the Supreme Court, Sueanna Lovell on behalf of the Office of the Chancellor, since Williams holds the “executive” positions of AG and Minister of Legal Affairs, a copy of Justice Holder’s report to the Chancellor was sent to the president, “purely as a matter of information and courtesy.”

It was stated that no complaint was made to the president.

Stabroek News had earlier reported that during a meeting attended by all the judges of the Supreme Court, following the courtroom incident, a unanimous decision was taken to write to the president on the matter.

Observers had questioned why it was that the president was informed of the matter when the judiciary and the executive are two independent branches of government.

The Chancellor’s release noted that during the hearing of a case before Justice Holder on March 23, 2017, Williams allegedly made certain statements. The case being heard at the time involved suspended Chairman of the Public Service Commission Carvil Duncan. Those statements, the release said, were viewed by Justice Holder as offensive.

According to the release the judge made an official report to the acting Chancellor and in that report he outlined the events which transpired in court and demanded an apology from Williams.

The AG was accused by his predecessor, attorney Anil Nandlall, of threatening Justice Holder during the hearing. Nandlall is one of Duncan’s attorneys.

Williams, however, denied that he threatened the judge. Observers have, however, noted that even in his own rendering of the events of the day in question, Williams’ words did not comport with what was expected from the Attorney General, Minister of Legal Affairs and the Leader of the Bar.

Uttered

In his letter to the acting Chancellor, Justice Holder said that Williams uttered the words, “I could say what I want to say and when I want to say it, I have always been like that.” Justice Holder said he left the bench without adjourning the matter or giving instructions to either party.

“I am not prepared to sit to hear Mr Williams as an attorney-at-law in any matter whatsoever, unless he makes a genuine and meaningful apology to my satisfaction, in open court, both to me and to the Members of the Bar since they too were scandalized by his despicable conduct,” he wrote in his report, which was seen by this newspaper.

Williams had told a press conference that when Justice Holder indicated that he was going to adjourn the matter, he asked whether he could be permitted to ask Duncan’s confidential secretary one final question.

He was permitted to do so. According to Williams, after noticing that the judge was about to leave the bench, he enquired whether the answer to the last question was recorded. “The judge to my surprise said, ‘Mr Williams you are not in charge of my court.’ And I said, ‘No sir’ …but the judge then said to me ‘Mr Williams I interpret what you are saying to mean that I deliberately did not record the answer that was given by the witness previously and I take great umbrage at that.’ And I said, ‘Sir, surely that is not on your record, because I never said anything to that effect or intended anything like that,’” he explained.

Williams recalled that he told the judge that his comments reminded him of a similar allegation made against him by a magistrate several years ago.

“He [the magistrate] cited me for contempt and the rest is history. And I said that since then I have always been very particular about what I say to the courts and to be precise so that nothing else like that could return and I said coincidentally that magistrate is dead now and I moved on,” he said.

Based on what Stabroek News was told, Granger wrote to Williams about the matter.

In reply, Williams said that there is no reason for him to apologise to Justice Holder, whom he suggested should recuse himself from hearing the case brought by Duncan.

Asked yesterday at a post-Cabinet press briefing whether the president has responded to Williams’ letter, Minister of State Joseph Harmon was unable to say.

“I do know, yes, for a fact, that the Attorney General has written his Excellency but those are correspondences directly to His Excellency, the president, and in due course he will act as necessary,” he said.

Asked whether he knows what the next step in this matter will be, he responded, “No, I wouldn’t be able to say.”

Senior Counsel Ralph Ramkarran has said that failing a public apology “the Chancellor (ag) can convene the Full Court and set in motion the process to hear a complaint of misconduct against Mr Williams. The Full Court can impose a penalty as severe as disbarment.”